Romney's Flip-Flops (And I Don't Mean His Shoes)

If Mitt Romney the man was even half as flexible as Mitt Romney the politician, he very well might be over in London with Team USA preparing for the men’s gymnastics competition.

Rarely has America seen a politician with as many different positions as Romney.

The funny thing about Mitt Romney and his flip-flopping problem is that, although it is incredibly well documented, it’s almost as though no one with the Obama campaign is interested in talking about it.

John Kerry lost the presidential election in 2004, in part, because of two things: his “flip-flop” on the war in Iraq and the disingenuous and disgusting “Swift Boating” of his time in Vietnam by a group associated with President Bush’s adviser, Karl Rove.

The Swift Boat ads were dirty, untruthful and offensive, but that’s what politics today consists of. Negative ads sell and that was about as negative as an ad can get. 

The accusation of a flip-flop against Kerry was a little dirty, but at least it was, in a sense, truthful. Kerry did vote to for military action in Iraq and Kerry did campaign for president by speaking out against it. Those are the facts. What made the charge dirty is that Kerry voted for a war based on what turned out to be lies and fabricated intelligence. He wasn’t the only one to do so either.

Kerry wrote in a blog piece for the Huffington Post in 2006, “There’s nothing -- nothing -- in my life in public service I regret more, nothing even close. We should all be willing to say: I was wrong, I should not have voted for the Iraq War Resolution.”

The fact of that matter is that John Kerry’s misguided vote on the war was exactly that: misguided. When Kerry saw what was happening in Iraq and when he saw that there were no weapons of mass destruction, he spoke out against it and admitted he was wrong. People are allowed to have their opinions evolve.

People’s views and opinions change, it’s only natural. What isn’t natural, though, is for those views to ebb and flow based almost solely on where, when or to whom someone is speaking. It’s quite clear that Romney does this. Perhaps the only person in America who doesn’t acknowledge this fact is Romney himself. Based on his campaign speeches so far, it appears that Romney may have amnesia.

Romney’s flip-flopping is essentially George H. W. Bush’s famous 1988 Republican National Convention line, “Read my lips: no new taxes.” Despite his pledge, Bush raised taxes during his presidency. The difference is that Romney has essentially pledged no new taxes on nearly every conceivable issue and then gone on to raise them.

If Kerry is to be labeled a flip-flopper for the rest of his political career for changing just one of his views (that was based on a lie in the first place), what label do you get for changing your view on 10, 15 or 20 different issues? Liar? Phony? Flake? Wishy-washy? Weak?

BusinessInsider.com compiled a list of just 14 of Mitt Romney’s flip-flops. Some of the issues he’s changed his opinion on (at least twice) are: immigration, gun control laws, global warming, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, gay marriage, embryonic stem cell research, “RomneyCare” health care, taxes, money in politics and abortion (he’s had at least four different opinions).

Luckily for Romney, many voters tend not to care about facts and only about what they’re assaulted with over the radio and on their televisions.  That’s why it’s so surprising that the Obama campaign hasn’t been more forceful about all of Romney’s various viewpoints on the issues.

The election will be a close one, but the Obama campaign has almost 20 years of Mitt Romney flip-flops to call him out on. Romney’s history of indecision, lies and harmful business tactics has all but handed Obama re-election if they choose to use that history. There are many reasons that John McCain passed over Romney as his vice presidential pick in 2008 and the documents highlighting all those reasons were released just a few weeks ago. It’s up to the Obama campaign to exploit those reasons to their advantage.

Politics are a dirty game and the winner is usually the one who digs the deepest and gets the dirtiest. The nice thing for President Obama is that he and his advisers don’t have to dig too far down to find the best dirt.

Guns

Another tragic mass shooting just occurred in a movie theater in Aurora, Colo. last week and that means it’s now time for Americans to once again, completely ignore the much-needed American conversation on gun control.

American’s are a strong-willed and stubborn people; we stick to our beliefs (whether or not we’re actually right), seemingly regardless of the issue.  It’s 2012 and we still have people arguing against evolution. Clearly, this country is full of people who simply won’t give up and just admit they’re wrong.

Persevering is what made this country the most powerful and successful country in the world, but sometimes, for the good of all, one must admit they’re wrong. That’s what this country needs right now. We need for citizens and politicians to finally admit that they’re wrong and that we do in fact need stricter gun control laws.

Once upon a time, there was an assault weapons ban in this country. It was a ban that was allowed to expire in 2004 during the George W. Bush presidency; a ban that, if still on the books today, would have made the main gun used in the Aurora massacre illegal and unavailable for purchase.

The ban also would have prevented the shooter from legally obtaining the 100 round high-capacity magazine he used for his legally purchased AR-15 semi-automatic assault rifle. The high-capacity drum magazine used in conjunction with the AR-15 allowed the shooter to fire 60 rounds per minute.

The question that our president and our politicians need to be asking is, “Why is such a weapon necessary?” 

Unfortunately for the gun lobby and gun-obsessed citizens across America, the simple truth is: such a gun and ammunition magazine are NOT necessary, unless of course the animal you’re hunting has the ability to shoot back with equally heavy arms.

There is no reason whatsoever that any citizen should be able to purchase a semi-automatic assault rifle and there’s even less of a reason that anyone should be able to purchase a 100 round magazine to use with the gun.

Fortunately for those same people, they don’t have to have a reason. The gun is legal, the high-capacity magazine is legal and they can own the gun for whatever reason they see fit.

For the purposes of full disclosure, I will admit that the very first gun I ever picked up and shot was the same gun that the shooter used in Aurora. In my sophomore year of college I went to a local gun range and shot my friend’s AR-15. I know how it feels to hold that gun and how it feels to shoot that gun.

The AR-15 is extremely powerful and a little frightening to shoot, especially when it’s the first gun you’ve ever shot. I also know that, although “fun” to shoot, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever that anyone outside of the military should ever be able to use that gun. My friend also realized that and got rid of it a few years ago.

Although I don’t own any guns, I have shot plenty and I find going to a gun range and shooting to be fun, but it’s also something I don’t necessarily ever want to be comfortable with doing.

The thing that many people don’t seem to realize is that guns are not toys; they are machines capable of killing any living creature. According to statistics from GunPolicy.org, there were 9,146 gun homicides in the United States in 2009. Just for comparison’s sake, there were 18 in the United Kingdom, 188 in Germany, 11 in Japan (2008), 55 in Switzerland (the country with one of the highest rates of guns per capita) and 173 in Canada. That means that there were 8,701 more gun homicides in the United States in 2009 than in all those countries combined.

Clearly, we have a problem in America. Unfortunately, this is not a new problem. The United States has a history of violence and is a country born out of a bloody revolution. For much of America’s history, it’s been a nation that has shot first and asked questions later, if at all.

It may be time, just as it is every 4 months or so when one of these tragedies happens somewhere in America, to discuss tightening our gun control laws. What happened in Aurora is not unique. What happened at Fort Hood in 2009, Virginia Tech in 2007 and Littleton, Colo. in 1999 were not unique. In fact, according to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, there are over 20 mass shootings in the United States every year. The Brady Campaign website has a 62 page non-comprehensive document listing most of the mass shootings across the U.S. since 2005. According to the document, the Aurora shooting was the sixth mass shooting in the U.S. in the month of July alone.

While the vast majority of gun owners in America are law-abiding citizens that properly store their weapons and use them carefully, safely and responsibly, there are also plenty of people who simply have no right owning a gun.

There is no law on the books that requires any sort of mental health evaluation before purchasing a firearm and there are barely even background checks.

I’ve gone with a friend to purchase a gun before and it took literally 10 minutes from the time we walked in the store to walk back out with a newly purchased rifle. That is simply insane. Nobody needs a gun in 10 minutes. There is no feasible reason that anyone could have that would make acquiring a firearm in less than 15 minutes acceptable. None. My friend didn’t need that gun right that minute, nor does anyone else.

This country needs to take these things seriously. Guns are weapons. We’re required to call a bakery weeks in advance to order a cake, something that can be made from scratch within a day. Why should it be faster to buy an assault rifle and 1,000 rounds of ammunition? What sense does that make?

We have a president and Congress that live in fear of the gun lobby. The National Rifle Association has become powerful enough that they can buy time on TV or the radio and actually influence an election in many parts of the country with their lies and falsehoods. The NRA grades politicians solely on issues related to guns and those grades can and do determine whether that particular politician is re-elected or not.

If President Obama came out tomorrow and spoke about how the assault weapons ban needs to be put back in place, the election would be over. So long as Mitt Romney didn’t mention a word about gun control, he could ride around in a car made of gold and spit on the homeless at all his campaign stops and it wouldn’t make one iota of difference, he would beat Obama in a landslide come November.

That’s not what this country should be about. This country can’t succeed in a culture of fear. Our elected politicians shouldn’t be afraid to say what needs to be said and do what needs to be done. There needs to be room for a frank and honest discussion about guns.

Guns have simply become too easy to obtain and the statistics bear that out. According to the Small Arms Survey of 2007 conducted by the Graduate Institute of International Studies in Geneva, there are 90 guns per 100 citizens and according to the Brady Campaign, 97,820 Americans are shot each year. That averages out to nearly 270 people per day. Based on the previously listed figure of gun homicides, that means that guns in America kill approximately 27 people per day. That is a horrifying number for any civilized society, let alone one that calls itself a world leader.

After the Columbine massacre in 1999, the question was “how many more Columbine’s until we do something about guns in this country?” Then we asked about how many more Virginia Tech’s and how many more Fort Hood’s and now Americans are forced to ask, “how many more Aurora’s until we do something about guns in this country?”

What’s so scary is that we don’t know which massacre Americans will have to ask about next. If history is any guide, there will be another one and another after that. And we’ll all still be left to ask, “how many more?”

New Pieces

I'm going to try updating this blog a little more with new pieces that I plan on writing whenever I have the time and feel like writing.

They will be editorials and they will be topical. Whatever is in the news that I find bothersome, I will try to write about.

First one coming very soon...